On Wed, Sep 12, 2012  Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

>>>  makes a bridge between two fields,
>> >>  What two fields?
> >  The study of the notion of truth, (epistemology, philosophy,
> metaphysics, it is interdisciplinary) and theology.

Translation from the original bafflegab: The truth is important.
And by the way, there is no field of theology, it has nothing intelligent
to say because it has not discovered any facts.

> Plato's questions are at the origin of science.

But Plato lived 2500 years ago and we are no longer at the origin of
science, it's time to move on.

> It is no use to say more if you don't have read it, and don't want to get
> informed.

 I didn't say I haven't read Plato, I said I knew more philosophy than he
did, a lot more.

> > Making you defending Aristotle theology, confusing it with the physical
> science.

There is no doubt that somebody around here is confused because I have said
more than once that Aristotle was the worst physicist who ever lived. Even
his reputation as a great logician is overstated, he used some very
intricate pure logic and concluded with certainty that women MUST have
fewer teeth than men. They don't. Aristotle had a wife, he could have
counted her teeth at any time but never bothered to because like most
philosophers he already knew the truth, or thought he did.

> I have never seen a paper in physics assuming a primitive physical
> reality, still less a paper showing how to test such idea.

I have no idea what you mean but I will say this, if you have never seen a
physics paper even attempt to do something then its probably not very
important because they've attempted some pretty wacky things.

 John K Clark

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to